CIVIL PROCEDURE ESSAY #1.



Similar documents
ASSEMBLY BILL No. 597

HOUSE BILL No July 18, 2013, Introduced by Rep. Heise and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.

PART III Discovery. Overview of the Discovery Process CHAPTER 8 KEY POINTS THE NATURE OF DISCOVERY. Information is obtainable by one or more discovery

Case 6:10-cv DNH-ATB Document 76-1 Filed 08/22/11 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

STATE OF OKLAHOMA. 2nd Session of the 53rd Legislature (2012) AS INTRODUCED

Enrolled Copy H.B. 287

The Intrusive Nature of Discovery in U.S. Patent Litigation

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ALASKA ORDER NO Pretrial Conferences; Scheduling; Management.

MISSISSIPPI LEGISLATURE REGULAR SESSION 2013

Professors David Levine & Morris Ratner 1

ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

Information or instructions: Defendant s Cross-claims and counterclaims PREVIEW

ATTORNEY HELP CENTER: MEDICAL MALPRACTICE

ASSEMBLY BILL No. 597

Complaint - Walmart Substance on Floor in Frozen Food Dept.

Automobile Negligence Lawsuits

Friday 31st October, 2008.

Northern Insurance Company of New York v. Resinski

EXPOSING THE SURVEILLANCE DEFENSE - DISCOVERY OF SURVEILLANCE VIDEOS AND REPORTS. Barry R. Conybeare Conybeare Law Office, P.C., St.

If you have been sued as a defendant in a civil case...keep reading.

Medical Litigation in 2012

Potentially Exculpatory Evidence in Protected/Private/Controlled Record CITY v. DEFENDANT, JUSTICE COURT Case No

Case 2:10-cv CW Document 90 Filed 02/02/15 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION

The Foundation of the International Association of Defense Counsel SURVEY OF INTERNATIONAL LITIGATION PROCEDURES: A REFERENCE GUIDE

HOUSE BILL No Washburne

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF MULTNOMAH

2014 IL App (1st) U. No IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

Case4:12-cv KAW Document2-1 Filed06/25/12 Page1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, OAKLAND DIVISION

CALIFORNIA TORT FORMS FROM EXPERT LITIGATORS (1st Edition) July 2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS

New York Civil Practice

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

Case: 1:10-cv WHB Doc #: 31 Filed: 09/02/10 1 of 14. PageID #: 172

Supreme Court Rule 201. General Discovery Provisions. (a) Discovery Methods.

Attorney for Plaintiff SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES COUNTY CENTRAL DISTRICT STANLEY MOSK COURTHOUSE

FILING A PERSONAL INJURY OR PROPERY DAMAGE LAWSUIT

How To Sue A Truck Driver For Causing A Car Accident In New Jersey

Case: 1:12-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 03/06/12 Page 1 of 6 PageID #:1

TORT AND INSURANCE LAW REPORTER. Informal Discovery Interviews Between Defense Attorneys and Plaintiff's Treating Physicians

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

AGUIRRE v. UNION PACIFIC RR. CO. 597 Cite as 20 Neb. App N.W.2d

Civil Suits: The Process

COMPLAINT. Plaintiff [PLAINTIFF] hereby sues the Defendants, [DEFENDANT #1], [DEFENDANT INTRODUCTION

Oklahoma Supreme Court Declares Oklahoma s Lawsuit Reform Act of 2009 Unconstitutional

All About Motions To Dismiss

California Bar Examination. Essay Questions and Selected Answers

2 California Evidence (5th), Discovery

CAUSE NO. JUSTIN GROGG IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF Plaintiff, vs. DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DIVISION

7.010 PLEAS, NEGOTIATIONS, DISCOVERY AND TRIAL DATES IN CRIMINAL CASES

Colorado s Civil Access Pilot Project and the Changing Landscape of Business Litigation

Personal Injury Litigation

Discovery Devices. Rule 26 requires the automatic disclosure of a host of basic information regarding the case

California Points and Authorities

TITLE I REDUCTION OF ABUSIVE LITIGATION

VIRGINIA ACTS OF ASSEMBLY SESSION

FILED December 15, 2015 Carla Bender 4 th District Appellate Court, IL

Removal to Federal Court - The New Rules Making it a Federal Case: New Developments Presented by Kevin Schiferl Frost Brown Todd (Indianapolis, IN)

Case 3:10-cv DRD Document 31 Filed 05/05/11 Page 1 of 9

Case 2:10-cv JCM-LRL Document 1 Filed 07/22/10 Page 1 of 8

~INAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

How To Process A Small Claims Case In Anarizonia

Reed Armstrong Quarterly

Discovery Expert Reports

2015 IL App (5th) U NO IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIFTH DISTRICT

Litigating the Products Liability Case: Discovery

Article 31 of the N.Y. Civil Practice Law and Rules (hereinafter referred to

SPECIAL CIVIL A GUIDE TO THE COURT

Large Law Firm structure

STRUCTURED SETTLEMENTS

Assembly Bill No. 5 CHAPTER 5

Case 1:12-cv VEC Document 206 Filed 10/15/15 Page 1 of 10 USDC SDNY DOCUMENT ELECTRONICALLY FILED DOC #:

GOVERNMENT PROSECUTIONS AND QUI TAM ACTIONS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PHILADELPHIA COUNTY FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL TRIAL DIVISION

In the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas

PRETRIAL LITIGATION IN A NUTSHELL. R. LAWRENCE DESSEM Professor of Law University of Tennessee ST. PAUL, MINN. WEST PUBLISHING CO.

IC Chapter 5.7. Medicaid False Claims and Whistleblower Protection

IN THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, SALT LAKE COUNTY STATE OF UTAH. Case No. : Judge:

Illinois Supreme Court Requires Plaintiff to Apportion Settlements Among Successive Tortfeasors

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PHILADELPHIA COUNTY FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL TRIAL DIVISION

RULE 35 & MEDICAL EXAMINATIONS

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION INFORMATION

No. 103,175 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS SYLLABUS BY THE COURT

IN THE COURT OF QUEEN S BENCH OF ALBERTA JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF EDMONTON TANYA LABONTE, JESSE STECHYNSKY AND RHONDA MCPHEE. - and

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO CP COA

No. C UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE

Case 2:09-cv AJM-KWR Document 19 Filed 02/10/10 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

2012 IL App (1st) U. No IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO

Making Sure The Left Hand Knows What The Right Hand Is Doing Representing Health Care Providers In Medical Negligence Cases by: Troy J. Crotts, Esq.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY DEFENDANT S ANSWER

F First Judicial District of Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Trial Division Civil CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

COBB COUNTY STATE COURT STATE OF GEORGIA * * * * * * * * * * SUMMONS CASE NO.:

Transcription:

CIVIL PROCEDURE ESSAY #1. Steven is the defendant in a negligence claim brought in Federal Court by Donna. 1. Steven asked the court to compel discovery of information concerning the statement, made by Donna s Investigator, that Donna had contributed to an automobile accident. 2. Steven had a ticket by Statesville revoked in accident court, which stated that Steven did not run through a red light as related to Donna and the car accident. 3. Steven thought that only Federal Claims could be brought in Federal Court, but Donna maintains that her bills (current medical, $45,000, and pain and suffering $38,000), should allow her to continue with her claim. Donna has a vacation home in State B, which is where Steven resides. 4. Steven thinks that the basis of the claim, namely, that Steven was driving along Main Street, on May 6, 2006, and at the corner of Main and Maple, negligently knocked down a signpost causing injury to Donna, was not enough to state a sufficient claim. Discuss.

Steven asked the court to compel discovery of information concerning the statement, made by Donna s Investigator, that Donna had contributed to an automobile accident. 1. STEVEN'S MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY. The various instruments of discovery serve (1) as a device to narrow and clarify the basic issues between the parties, and (2) as a device for ascertaining the facts, or information as to the existence or whereabouts of facts, relative to those issues. RULE 26, SCOPE OF DISCOVERY. The scope of discovery is large, and includes any matter, not privileged, which is relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action. ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT RULE PRIVILEGE. Applies also to the assistance of investigators and other agents in the compilation of materials in preparation for trial. ANTICIPATION OF LITIGATION. MENTAL IMPRESSIONS. Absolute privilege. OTHER TANGIBLE MATERIAL. Qualified privilege. EXCEPTION. UNDUE HARDSHIP. COMPELLING DISCOVERY. SANCTIONS.

Steven had a ticket by Statesville revoked in accident court, which stated that Steven did not run through a red light as related to Donna and the car accident. 2. STEVEN HAD A TICKET REVOKED IN ACCIDENT COURT. Steven did not run a red light. COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL. Issue preclusion / collateral estoppel will apply when a prior issue of fact or law has been decided on the merits, and was reasonably necessary to support the judgment in the prior adjudication. The issue must have been fairly and fully litigated in the prior adjudication, for collateral estoppel to apply, and a final judgment must have been entered. Decided on the Merits. Reasonably Necessary to Support the Judgment. Fully and Fairly Litigated. Final Judgment on the Merits.

Steven thought that only Federal Claims could be brought in Federal Court, but Donna maintains that her bills (current medical, $45,000, and pain and suffering $38,000), should allow her to continue with her claim. Donna has a vacation home in State B, which is where Steven resides. 3. STEVEN MAINTAINS THAT ONLY FEDERAL CLAIMS MAY BE BROUGHT IN FEDERAL COURT. SECTION 1331. FEDERAL QUESTION. A federal courts has original jurisdiction over civil actions arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States. SECTION 1332. DIVERSITY OF CITIZENSHIP. FULL / COMPLETE DIVERSITY. All plaintiffs and defendants must be domiciled in different states. DOMICILE. AMOUNT IN CONTROVERSY / JURISDICTIONAL AMOUNT. The amount in controversy must exceed $75K, irrespective of courts costs and interest. LEGAL CERTAINTY TEST. AGGREGATION OF CLAIMS.

Steven thinks that the basis of the claim, namely, that Steven was driving along Main Street, on May 6, 2006, and at the corner of Main and Maple, negligently knocked down a signpost causing injury to Donna, was not enough to state a sufficient claim. Discuss. 4. SUFFICIENCY OF DONNA'S COMPLAINT. NOTICE V. CODE PLEADING. FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 8. A plaintiff has an obligation to provide the grounds of his entitlement to relief in order to give the defendant fair notice of what the claim is and the grounds upon which it rests. Under FRCP 8, a plaintiff must give a short and plain statement of subject matter jurisdiction, a statement of the claim, and their entitlement to relief. JURISDICTION. GROUNDS OF CLAIM. RELIEF.